1) I did an AFMA on the lens with my 5DMKII the other day, and ended up dialing it in at +5. Very happy with the result. I did the 135L, 40mm pancake, and Tamron 70-300 VC at the same time.

2) I took the lens out in fairly extreme weather the other day for the first time. Fairly heavy rain, cold, fog, etc... The lens performed very admirably and I felt confident in the weathersealing. Here are couple of the results from that outing:

3) Finally, this is the second copy of the lens I am using. I exchanged the first copy after testing revealed some concerns over the VC functioning up to spec. I have been really, really pleased with the second copy and feel that it resolves better at infinity than the first copy, making it a better option for landscape.

I like the lens more and more as I use it. This weekend's wedding will be interesting: I am the officiating minister, my wife and I are also singing during the ceremony, and I am the official photographer (I guess I am the Walmart of weddings ) I have had to subcontract the ceremony to a second shooter. This is going to be a long day, but the Tamron will get its first wedding action since I purchased it a month ago.

Love both of those shots. That makes me feel better about the lens, if you've taken it out into the cold, fog, rain and it performed well. I'm getting a copy from LensRentals, and I should have a chance to MFA it before I use it tomorrow evening when I'm shooting the technical show for a dance performance, and then Friday for the actual performance.

Ok, so rented the lens from LensRentals, first shots with it tonight. I was shooting the technical/test performance for a burlesque holiday show. Small space (bar performance area), lighting was mostly small spots, so pretty bad most of the time, and then a bit too bright over part of the image some of the time. All in all, very challenging lighting. I'm downloading the images as we speak, but here are my first impressions based off of what I saw on the back of the camera (5d3, MFA via FoCal, +14 wide, -1 tele).

The VC (image stabilization) works well. Did a few test shots at 1/10 sec f/2.8 and zoomed in some on the camera, looked quite good, although I haven't extensively tested it yet.

So, for starters, the zoom ring is nice and wide, but reversed from what I'm used to. It's at the far end of the barrel, and you rotate to the left to zoom out, not to the right like the rest of my Canon lenses. The focusing ring is fairly narrow, but the grip is quite good. It's right where I'm used to resting my fingers when I'm holding the camera, and I suspect I might have confused the lens as it thought I was trying to do FTM, when I was just resting my fingers or accidentally shifted it trying to zoom in/out.

The focusing is a bit slower than the L lenses I've used (24-105, 135, 17-40, rented 14L, 24-70L v1, 70-200 2.8 IS v2). Not bad really, but not snappy like I'm used to. I shot most of the night in AI-Servo, since they were dancing and moving all around. As I said the lighting was quite challenging, but even when the AF points I was using was over the subject in decent lighting, I always felt like I had to wait a second or two for the camera to lock focus and start tracking. Quite annoying actually, and nothing something I'm used to. Part of it may have been, as stated above, my fingers rested right on the focusing ring so I may have confused it.

Otherwise, based off of the back of the camera, IQ seems pretty good, bokeh is nice, and colors are good. Seems sharp, although some of the shots the focus was off and I suspect it's because the AF motor couldn't keep up, or the AF on the 5d3 couldn't keep up, or whatever it was that made the AF seem to hesitate. I'll have more to say on this after I finish downloading the shots from tonight, and tomorrow night during the actual performance, and then process through everything.

Leaving aside the IQ, if I can't figure out the AF in this kind of lower light, I might have to not get this lens, which would make me sad as this is exactly the environment I'd use this in. I'll try using my 24-105 briefly in the same lighting conditions to see if it shows similar hesitation, and if so it's the camera/lighting, and not the lens and I'll have to test out in other dim lighting conditions.

Thanks Dustin! That is one thing I noticed as well about it, it's heavy!

I haven't had a chance to get up many photos from my time with it, but I'll put some up this weekend (I hope). The 2nd night shooting with it went better on the AF I think, but it was still quite challenging. Unfortunately I didn't have a chance to try out better lighting conditions (You think your lighting was bad? Try ISO 6400, f/2.8, and being 1/60-1/125 with dancers moving all around and a few, seemingly almost random 'spot' lights. I'd have killed for the lighting you shot with). So, I'm not feeling as bad about the AF, and I'll probably get this lens in the next couple of months.

Dustin, thanks for the update. I'm two weeks into my copy and couldn't be happier. Shot with it for a few days before Afma with focal and ended up at +5 both wide and tele (5diii), that just helped make everything pop just a little more. The tamron is a keeper. I'm now thinking about renting their new 70-200 2.8 and see if it gives the canon a serious run for its money as at least the initial impressions seem to think.

Thanks Dustin! That is one thing I noticed as well about it, it's heavy!

I haven't had a chance to get up many photos from my time with it, but I'll put some up this weekend (I hope). The 2nd night shooting with it went better on the AF I think, but it was still quite challenging. Unfortunately I didn't have a chance to try out better lighting conditions (You think your lighting was bad? Try ISO 6400, f/2.8, and being 1/60-1/125 with dancers moving all around and a few, seemingly almost random 'spot' lights. I'd have killed for the lighting you shot with). So, I'm not feeling as bad about the AF, and I'll probably get this lens in the next couple of months.

Wow, that is a challenging set of conditions. I can understand why you had some AF challenges there. I had no focusing issues because I also had enough ambient light that it wasn't really an issue. Like I said in the article, the AF isn't what I would call lightning fast, but it is quick enough and, more importantly, accurate.

Dustin, thanks for the update. I'm two weeks into my copy and couldn't be happier. Shot with it for a few days before Afma with focal and ended up at +5 both wide and tele (5diii), that just helped make everything pop just a little more. The tamron is a keeper. I'm now thinking about renting their new 70-200 2.8 and see if it gives the canon a serious run for its money as at least the initial impressions seem to think.

Nice! On my MKII I can only set one AFMA, so it is set for 70mm on mine. I'll pick up a MKIII body next year. I pay for all of my gear out of photography proceeds, so I need to do a few more gigs over the next month or so before I lay down the cash. I'm debating at the moment whether or not to sell my MKII or keep it as a FF extra body.

Yea, lighting conditions were cray. but I got some good shots! Anyway, I think I will be getting it, as I said.

Whenever you do get the 5d3, I would recommend holding onto the 5d2. Backup camera is always a good thing, and you can always 2-gun it, put one lens on one, and another on the other so you don't have to wait to switch lenses before continuing to shoot. Put a wide/super-wide on the 5d2, and your normal or telephoto on the 5d3. The great part is you can share both CF cards, AND batteries!

Yea, lighting conditions were cray. but I got some good shots! Anyway, I think I will be getting it, as I said.

Whenever you do get the 5d3, I would recommend holding onto the 5d2. Backup camera is always a good thing, and you can always 2-gun it, put one lens on one, and another on the other so you don't have to wait to switch lenses before continuing to shoot. Put a wide/super-wide on the 5d2, and your normal or telephoto on the 5d3. The great part is you can share both CF cards, AND batteries!

That is what I am leaning towards. I do something similar with my 60D, but it works less well now that I have reoriented my lens collections towards all FF glass. Fortunately my 60D does share batteries with the 5D already, but not memory cards.

Yea, lighting conditions were cray. but I got some good shots! Anyway, I think I will be getting it, as I said.

Whenever you do get the 5d3, I would recommend holding onto the 5d2. Backup camera is always a good thing, and you can always 2-gun it, put one lens on one, and another on the other so you don't have to wait to switch lenses before continuing to shoot. Put a wide/super-wide on the 5d2, and your normal or telephoto on the 5d3. The great part is you can share both CF cards, AND batteries!

That is what I am leaning towards. I do something similar with my 60D, but it works less well now that I have reoriented my lens collections towards all FF glass. Fortunately my 60D does share batteries with the 5D already, but not memory cards.

One thing I'm sorely missing from the 1DX that I'd love is the spot-linked metering. Obviously not so useful when shooting full manual, but if I can even leave ISO on auto with spot-linked metering, I can worry less about the subject that I'm AF on to have blown out highlights in changing lighting conditions. Ah well, when I hit the lotto I'll buy me one

You know, if you've got a spare 60D laying around, maybe you can throw MagicLantern on it and maybe play with doing some video. If you can even have just a bit of video of the ceremony, some clips of the reception party, a bit of crying when people are giving toasts, that's probably worth something good. Just need a pretty good tripod, and a lot of practice.

Yea, lighting conditions were cray. but I got some good shots! Anyway, I think I will be getting it, as I said.

Whenever you do get the 5d3, I would recommend holding onto the 5d2. Backup camera is always a good thing, and you can always 2-gun it, put one lens on one, and another on the other so you don't have to wait to switch lenses before continuing to shoot. Put a wide/super-wide on the 5d2, and your normal or telephoto on the 5d3. The great part is you can share both CF cards, AND batteries!

I do use the 60D (with Magic Lantern) that way. I actually prefer the 60D as a video body in many ways to my 5D. Better manual control, and the articulating LCD is huge for video.That is what I am leaning towards. I do something similar with my 60D, but it works less well now that I have reoriented my lens collections towards all FF glass. Fortunately my 60D does share batteries with the 5D already, but not memory cards.

One thing I'm sorely missing from the 1DX that I'd love is the spot-linked metering. Obviously not so useful when shooting full manual, but if I can even leave ISO on auto with spot-linked metering, I can worry less about the subject that I'm AF on to have blown out highlights in changing lighting conditions. Ah well, when I hit the lotto I'll buy me one

You know, if you've got a spare 60D laying around, maybe you can throw MagicLantern on it and maybe play with doing some video. If you can even have just a bit of video of the ceremony, some clips of the reception party, a bit of crying when people are giving toasts, that's probably worth something good. Just need a pretty good tripod, and a lot of practice.

Great review...I myself was seriously considerimg this lens and the Mk2 which i can't afford.However, after reading your review, it still left me in a dilemma because of 1 point...you had to get a 2nd copy...I too own Tamrons and they both had to go back for adjustments..I was expecting the newer ones to improve in the QC but unfortunately, the same problems of old stll exist..that was the main reason why i stopped with Tamrons and stuck to Canon/Sigmas since the new Sigmas are brilliant. Although this lens is $1k cheaper than teh Canon, i believe it's less risk with a Canon vs this..I just wish Tamron would improve on their QC...not only do IQ vary on different lens, even teh focal range differed according to your review...that's bad ain't it.

Great review...I myself was seriously considerimg this lens and the Mk2 which i can't afford.However, after reading your review, it still left me in a dilemma because of 1 point...you had to get a 2nd copy...I too own Tamrons and they both had to go back for adjustments..I was expecting the newer ones to improve in the QC but unfortunately, the same problems of old stll exist..that was the main reason why i stopped with Tamrons and stuck to Canon/Sigmas since the new Sigmas are brilliant. Although this lens is $1k cheaper than teh Canon, i believe it's less risk with a Canon vs this..I just wish Tamron would improve on their QC...not only do IQ vary on different lens, even teh focal range differed according to your review...that's bad ain't it.

There's no denying that I did return my first copy. That was being critical of course, but you are critical when you pay $1300 for a lens. I suspect the variance in focal length was more due to my flawed original testing that an actual sample variation. The upside, of course, is that in North America warranty is six years with Tamron. I would suspect that if you're going to have an issue it will show up during that period of time, and by the time that length of time is up you might be considering a new lens anyway

The focusing is a bit slower than the L lenses I've used (24-105, 135, 17-40, rented 14L, 24-70L v1, 70-200 2.8 IS v2). Not bad really, but not snappy like I'm used to. I shot most of the night in AI-Servo, since they were dancing and moving all around. As I said the lighting was quite challenging, but even when the AF points I was using was over the subject in decent lighting, I always felt like I had to wait a second or two for the camera to lock focus and start tracking. Quite annoying actually, and nothing something I'm used to. Part of it may have been, as stated above, my fingers rested right on the focusing ring so I may have confused it.

Leaving aside the IQ, if I can't figure out the AF in this kind of lower light, I might have to not get this lens, which would make me sad as this is exactly the environment I'd use this in. I'll try using my 24-105 briefly in the same lighting conditions to see if it shows similar hesitation, and if so it's the camera/lighting, and not the lens and I'll have to test out in other dim lighting conditions.

FYI, the low light AF Lock issue probably isn't the lens, it's the 5D3. That's why TWI didn't have AF problems. If you look around on this forum, the canon forums, etc you'll find a LOT of low light AF complaints with the 5D3 using any lens. Your comments sound a lot like the same thing. Some bodies seem to be affected more than others. I myself had to return my first copy of the 5D3 it was so bad. So it very well may have nothing to do with the lens.

There's no denying that I did return my first copy. That was being critical of course, but you are critical when you pay $1300 for a lens. I suspect the variance in focal length was more due to my flawed original testing that an actual sample variation. The upside, of course, is that in North America warranty is six years with Tamron. I would suspect that if you're going to have an issue it will show up during that period of time, and by the time that length of time is up you might be considering a new lens anyway

Unfortunately, i'm not in the US and i don't have the 6yr warranty. And i don't have the luxury like in the US where you can change for a new copy within a certain time frame. Over here, there's no such thing and the last time i had issue with my Tamron after a few days bought, i sent it in and they sent it back to Japan and it was gone for 1mth...i don't think i want to risk it again...they will fix it yes...but it's just a waste of time and hassle...